For the Furniture Manufacturing Industry
Voluntary Ergonomics Guideline
American Furniture Manufacturers Association
PO Box HP-7, High Point, NC 27261 (336) 884-5000 www.afma4u.org
Bill Perdue, Chair AFMA, High Point, N.C.
Nelson Bailey
Klaussner Furniture Industries Inc., Asheboro, N.C.
Gary T. Barger
Broyhill Furniture Industries Inc., Lenoir, N.C.
Kevin D. Beauregard
N.C. Department of Labor, Raleigh, N.C.
Wayne Bumgardner
Bernhardt Furniture Company, Lenoir, N.C.
Brian Burgess
Henredon Furniture Industries Inc., Morganton, N.C.
Betty J. Copeland
N.C. Department of Labor, Raleigh, N.C.
Ray Gantt
Unifour Productions Inc., Hickory, N.C.
Anita R. Goehringer
The Ergonomics Center of North Carolina, Raleigh, N.C.
Susan V. Haritos
N.C. Department of Labor, Raleigh, N.C.
Joseph H. Harrill
Henredon Furniture Industries Inc., Morganton, N.C.
John H. Johnson J-E-T-S Inc., Charlotte, N.C.
Les Kafel
N.C. Department of Labor, Raleigh, N.C.
Gary A. Mirka, Ph.D.
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C.
Janet Murphy
Pulaski Furniture Corporation, Pulaski, Va.
Mark Nichols
La-Z-Boy Incorporated, Monroe, Mich.
Karl Smink
Thomasville Furniture Industries, Thomasville, N.C.
White G. Watkins, Past Chair AFMA, High Point, N.C.
American Furniture
Manufacturers Association
Voluntary
Ergonomics Guideline for the Furniture
Manufacturing Industry
Washington, D.C. 20210
Mr. Steve Kincaid, President
American Furniture Manufacturers Association Post Office Box HP-7
High Point, NC 27261 Dear Mr. Kincaid:
On behalf of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, I would like to recognize the American Furniture Manufacturers Association (AFMA) for stepping forward to address work-related ergonomic issues in your industry. I congratulate you for your leadership in developing a tool that U.S. furniture manufacturers can use to reduce work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
Through your Alliance with the North Carolina Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Division, you produced a document that effectively explains basic ergonomic principles and outlines a variety of best practices proven successful in protecting workers involved in furniture manu- facturing. I commend your initiative for entering into this Alliance, which was the first to bring federal and state governments together with industry to develop voluntary ergonomic guidelines for a specific industry.
When Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao announced her comprehensive approach to ergonomics, she challenged industry to voluntarily develop ergonomic guidelines to meet their own specific needs. You have met this challenge by developing and publishing Voluntary Ergonomics Guideline for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry in partnership with North Carolina and federal OSHA. Your industry serves as a model for other industries as they, too, tackle these difficult issues.
I believe there is no more important task than the one we have committed to pursue every day: reducing death, injuries and illnesses in America’s work- places. We appreciate the solid foundation you have laid for American furni- ture manufacturers and their workers to move forward together toward this critical goal.
Sincerely,
John L. Henshaw
4 West Edenton Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1020
Mr. Steve Kincaid President
American Furniture Manufacturers Association PO Box HP-7
High Point, NC 27261 Dear Mr. Kincaid:
Congratulations on a job well-done! The American Furniture Manufacturers Association has risen to the challenge to help create safer, more productive workplaces. We have enjoyed working with you and USDOL to assist with the drafting of the Voluntary Ergonomics Guideline.
The Guideline demonstrates what industry and government can accomplish working together cooperatively. Your association has set a standard for other industries to follow.
In reviewing the guide, I see the association and its members have generated solutions to ergonomic hazards within furniture manufacturing that could not have come from an outside-in approach such as governmental rulemaking. The cooperative attitude of the many companies that participated contributed enormously to this guide.
I congratulate you and your members on your proactive approach. It will surely reduce injuries and illnesses in the furniture-manufacturing workforce. The North Carolina Department of Labor is proud to have participated in this endeavor.
Sincerely,
Cherie K. Berry
Voluntary Guideline for Ergonomics in Furniture Manufacturing 08/13/2002
Objective
To develop an industry-specific voluntary guideline document to assist employers and employees in recog- nizing and controlling potential ergonomic hazards.
Description
The guideline document will address ergonomic issues and proactive approaches, including best practices, to control or reduce ergonomic hazards. The suggested format would include the following parts:
1. Information Gathering & Research: Scientific, practical, and industry data will be reviewed to determine trends, potential hazards, successes, and other data relevant to guideline development.
Studies by NC State University and the Ergonomics Resource Center may be included.
2. Program Management Recommendations: Best management practices for identifying and addressing ergonomic hazards in furniture manufacturing.
3. Worksite Analysis Recommendations: Techniques to assist in analyzing specific activities or oper- ations in furniture manufacturing that could represent potential ergonomic hazards.
4. Hazard Control Recommendations: Lessons learned, best practice, and other approaches to con- trol hazards, including discussions of cost/benefit and effectiveness of each control approach.
5. Sample Work Process or Control Documents: Templates or sample documents that employers or employees can easily adapt to individual workplaces.
Roles and Responsibilities
The source of expertise for this voluntary guideline rests in the furniture manufacturing industry. As the industry representative, AFMA will establish an industry development team to lead the preparation and review of the guideline. The guideline is for voluntary use by furniture manufacturers and does not repre- sent a standard or a document to be used for enforcement actions. The North Carolina Department of Labor will assist and participate in the development team with studies, editing, review, publicity, and/or publica- tion of the guideline. The US Department of Labor, OSHA, is proposed as an alliance partner in the devel- opment of the guideline, and will assist, as requested, with promotion and publication of the completed voluntary furniture manufacturing ergonomic guideline. Other groups, such as NC State University or the Ergonomics Resource Center, may provide expertise as needed and specified by the development team.
Schedule
The development, review, and publication of the guideline will be determined by the development team, with a proactive expectation of a finished product.
Comments: For questions or comments, please call John Johnson, NCDOL, at (919) 807-2861.
Agreement:
Voted and accepted by AFMA Safety Committee Board, July 30, 2002 (see meeting minutes).
Acceptance by NCDOL: __________________________ , John H. Johnson, Deputy Commissioner
Many companies in the furniture manufacturing industry have made a substantial effort to reduce work-related injuries due to heavy lifting, repetitive motion, awkward and static work postures, vibration, and other recognized ergonomic stressors. The results achieved by these companies demonstrate that there are effective, affordable ways to protect furniture industry employees from injury while maintaining or, in many cases increasing productivity, quality and employee morale.
The Voluntary Ergonomics Guideline for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry is designed to guide furniture manufacturers through the process of developing an effective ergonomics program.
This guideline was developed in a unique partnership among the furniture industry, federal and state government, the academic community, and ergonomics specialists to create one of the first voluntary ergonomic guidelines in the nation for a specific industry. The developmental work group included talented and skilled professionals from the American Furniture Manufacturers Association; the N.C. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Division; North Carolina State University, Department of Industrial Engineering, Ergonomics Laboratory; and The Ergonomics Center of North Carolina.
To design this guideline, the Voluntary Ergonomics Guideline work group gathered and reviewed existing ergonomic practices and programs in the furniture industry and the latest research and information available on ergonomic stressors and control methods. The AFMA asked member companies for information on stressors present in their workplaces and for best practices, pro- grams and processes that have successfully reduced exposure to these stressors.
This guideline provides practical suggestions for employers to reduce the number and severity of workplace injuries by identifying, evaluating and controlling hazards using methods that have been work-proven in the furniture manufacturing industry. This voluntary guideline is intended for furniture manufacturing facilities. Other employers with similar work environments may find the information provided useful. However, care should be taken to ensure that ergonomics solutions are developed to meet the specific hazards and requirements of different work environments.
The American Furniture Manufacturers Association recognizes that the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 requires that, in addition to compliance with hazard-specific standards, all employers have a general duty to provide their employees with a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious injury. This guideline is designed to help employers meet this responsibility.
This guideline is advisory in nature and informational in content. This document does not repre- sent a new regulatory standard and imposes no new legal requirements. An employer’s failure to implement this guideline is not a violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
Introduction... 1
Furniture Manufacturing Ergonomics Program Management... 5
Ergonomics Program Elements... 5
Management Commitment... 7
Employee Participation and Involvement... 7
A Team Approach... 7
Identifying Ergonomics Concerns... 9
Trends Analysis... 9
Workplace Analysis... 11
Ergonomic Control Strategies... 14
Engineering Controls... 14
Work Practice Controls... 15
Administrative Controls... 16
Documentation of Ergonomic Improvements... 16
Web-based Repository... 17
Administrative Management... 18
Ergonomics Training Practices... 18
Employee Placement Strategies... 19
Management of MSDs... 21
Ergonomics Program Evaluation... 25
Appendix A —Common MSDs in the Workplace... 28
Appendix B —Posture Identification Sheet... 29
Appendix C —Core Elements of an Ergonomics Program... 30
Appendix D —Team Structures and Activities... 31
Appendix E —Spreadsheets for OSHA 300 Log Trends Analysis... 34
Appendix F —Tools for Identifying Ergonomic Concerns... 36
Appendix G —Engineering Controls for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry... 56
Appendix H —Documentation of Ergonomics Projects... 84
Appendix I —Return on Investment (ROI) for an Ergonomics Project... 87
Appendix J —Training and Education... 88
Appendix K —Placement Evaluation Process Model... 92
Appendix L —Forms for MSD Evaluation and Assessment Methods... 94
Appendix M —Suggested Treatments for MSDs... 99
Appendix N —Ergonomics Program Evaluation... 103
Glossary of Terms... 105
References... 107
Acknowledgments... 109
Introduction
Furniture Manufacturing: A Challenging Work Environment
Lost-time work injuries caused by cumulative and acute trauma of the musculoskeletal system such as carpal tunnel syndrome and back injuries are some of the most costly workers’ compensa- tion claims in U.S. industry today.
In its 1998 national figures, Liberty Mutual Group estimates that these injuries totaled more than 41 percent of all reported injuries with an estimated $15.7 billion dollars in direct workers’ com- pensation costs (Liberty, 2001).
Figures available from the N.C. Industrial Commission reveal that in 1996, the furniture industry in the state paid out an average of $33,000 in workers’ compensation for each musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) claim (North, 1996). But workers’ compensation is just the “tip of the iceberg”
when costs for lost time injuries are added up. Each claim averaged almost 97 lost workdays (North, 1996) … lost production, lost income, employee replacement costs, training, community support of the worker’s family and much more. Liberty Mutual Group estimates that the national average for indirect costs is between $2 and $5 for every workers’ compensation dollar paid (Liberty, 2002).
Though the furniture industry has had an excellent lost work time accident record over the past several years, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that nationally, in 2001, the wood house- hold furniture industry reported approximately 9,600 cases of musculoskeletal injuries and the upholstered furniture industry reported approximately 7,000 cases (U.S. Department, 2002).
Ergonomics is an effective approach to reducing the number and severity of these work-related injuries. Ergonomics is the practice of designing equipment, work tasks and work environments to conform to the capability of the worker … to create more efficient work places and prevent injuries to employees.
Ergonomics is a broad topic. This guideline deals only with the identification and control of ergonomic hazards that may cause musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). An MSD is an injury or disorder of the muscles, bones, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints, cartilage and/or spinal disks that may be caused or contributed to by exposure to work activities and conditions involving certain risk factors.
Musculoskeletal Disorders
MSDs are disorders involving the muscles, bones, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints, cartilage or spinal disks. The term “work-related musculoskeletal disorders” or WMSDs refers to (1) MSDs to which the work environment and the performance of work contribute significantly or (2) MSDs that are made worse or longer lasting by work conditions. In general, MSDs develop when physi- cal stressors overcome the body’s ability to heal and repair itself.
Physical risk factors in the workplace, or “ergonomic stressors,” along with personal characteris- tics and social factors, are thought to contribute to the development of MSDs (Cohen, 1997).
Some MSDs are caused by physical exposures in nonworking activities such as sports and hob- bies. Genetics, age and other medical conditions such as arthritis, diabetes or degenerative disease can cause or contribute to the development of MSDs. MSDs can also result from certain psy- chosocial factors such as job dissatisfaction, monotonous work and limited job control (U.S.
General, 1997). This guideline addresses only physical factors in the workplace.
Work-related MSDs may occur in the form of cumulative and acute trauma disorders.
Cumulative Trauma Disorders (CTDs)
CTDs can result from exposure to repetitive, forceful or awkward tasks over a period of time.
Each stressful situation results in microtraumas to the specific region of the body, such as a mus- cle or tendon. Without adequate recovery, the accumulation of microtraumas results in pain, dis- comfort, numbness, reduced strength and/or inhibited dexterity. Symptoms of cumulative trauma typically cannot be associated with one specific event in time.
Examples of some of the more common cumulative trauma disorders that can occur in the work- place are shown in appendix A.
Acute Traumas
Acute traumas, such as lacerations, fractures, strains, sprains, contusions or bruises, can generally be attributed to a one-time, specific, instantaneous event. These traumas are often easier to diag- nose and treat because the causative stressors and affected body regions are more readily identi- fied. Acute traumas considered “ergonomics-related” include such injuries as muscle strains, low back pain, lumbar strains and other back concerns.
Ergonomic Stressors
Factors that increase risk for MSD development are called ergonomic stressors. The ergonomic stressors that furniture industry workers may face include:
Force—Physical effort required to lift, push, pull, grasp and pinch items in the work environment.
Heavy lifting such as in warehousing, upholstering and cabinet room activities represent jobs that place high forces on the back,
while upholstery, cushion stuff- ing and spring up are examples of jobs that require high force exertions from the hand, wrist and shoulder. Force is often required to handle and control equipment, tools, raw materials and finished products.
Repetition—Performing the same motion or series of motions continually or frequently. Most jobs on the furniture line require some level of repetitive movement.
Figure 1—An Example of the Use of Force in Furniture Manufacturing
Figure 2—An Example of a Repetitive Task in Furniture Manufacturing
Ergonomic Stressors:
• Force
• Repetition
• Awkward Postures
• Static Postures
• Vibration
• Contact Stress
• Environmental Factors
Awkward Postures—Body postures that deviate from normal resting or neutral positions place unnecessary stress on muscles, tendons and bones. Examples of awkward postures include reaching above shoulder height, kneeling, leaning over an assembly or sanding table, bending the wrist during spray operations, and twisting the body while lifting. See appendix B for visual presentations of neutral and awkward postures.
Static Postures—Assuming and holding any posture for a long period of time can place stress on the body, particularly if the posture is non- neutral. Static postures can accelerate the development of fatigue and discomfort.
Vibration—Vibration is the physical exposure to rapidly oscillating tools or machinery. Powered hand tools or anywhere an operator comes in contact with a vibration source, such as a tow motor operator, are places to look for this stressor.
Contact Stress—Physical contact between the body and sharp edges of tools, equipment and products. Pressing the body against a hard, sharp edge, such as the edge of a worktable or using the hand as a hammer to drive parts together in assembly are examples of this stressor.
Environmental Factors—Cold, heat, lighting and noise are factors in the work environment that can directly influence worker comfort and can indirectly influence risk of injury through interaction with the above-mentioned physical stressors. Other environmental factors such as slick work surfaces that are found in many upholstery and shipping departments can directly increase the risk of injury.
Many jobs combine multiple stressors in a single job. For example, a single subassembly job might combine awkward shoulder and back postures in reaching across the worktable, force in lifting the finished sub-assemblies to the pallet, exposure to vibration when using a handsander, repetitive wrist motions when using a powered screwdriver, and contact stress with a sharp worktable edge and when using the hand to hammer parts together. The combination of multiple stressors within a job or work task can create an increased risk of injury.
Ergonomics Programs Work to Control Risk
A U.S. General Accounting Office study of five corporations that fully implemented ergonomics programs show a 50 percent to 80 percent reduction in average dollar cost per MSD claim, a marked reduction in workdays lost to injury and a reduction in the number of injuries and illnesses (between 2.4 and 6.1 fewer injuries per 100 full-time employees) each year (U.S. General, 1997).
Furniture companies that have implemented ergonomics-based injury prevention programs and have applied engineering and work practice controls to reduce exposure to stressors have also achieved success in reducing work-related injuries and workers’ compensation costs. These com- panies have also noted other valuable benefits such as reduced absenteeism, increased productivi- ty, improved product quality and higher morale.
Figure 4—An Example of Contact Stress in Furniture
Manufacturing
Figure 3—An Example of an Awkward Posture in Furniture Manufacturing
Using This Voluntary Guideline
The information in this voluntary guideline is organized in five main sections: Ergonomics Program Management, Identifying Ergonomics Concerns, Ergonomic Control Strategies, Administrative Management and Ergonomics Program Evaluation, and a series of appendixes.
This document is to be used as a reference document, and therefore, each of the five main sections can stand alone, resulting in some redundancy across sections. Each of these five sections is a concise summary of the important components of each of these areas. The bulk of this document is in the appendixes wherein the work group has assembled a group of work-proven approaches that others in the furniture manufacturing industry have found to be effective. There are examples of engineering solutions and work process solutions to a number of specific ergonomic challenges in the furniture manufacturing workplace. There are also examples of teamwork structures,
ergonomics plans, reporting and analysis methods that are currently working for companies in the industry. The approach in developing this document is in keeping with the “best practices” style of the document.
The development of this guideline revealed more ideas than could be included in one publication.
Therefore, the American Furniture Manufacturing Association has created a companion Web site for this guideline. This Web site, http://www.afma4u.org/, contains a wider selection of specif- ic engineering and work process solutions to ergonomic stressors in the furniture manufacturing workplace. Most importantly, it is periodically updated with new ideas and submissions from companies in the furniture industry.
The AFMA trusts that the information found in this guideline and on the Web site will encourage furniture manufacturing companies to create and maintain successful ergonomics plans and work- place controls.
Furniture Manufacturing Ergonomics Program Management
Ergonomics Program Elements
The purpose of an ergonomics program is similar to that of any safety and health program—to help employers ensure that problems are identified and controlled, that any medical concerns are addressed and resolved as quickly as possible and that employees are protected. Many industries and companies have utilized the program elements described in the Ergonomics Program
Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants (U.S. Department, 1993) issued in 1993 as the model for their programs. At the core of the program is management’s commitment to implement- ing and managing the program and getting the employees involved in the process. Additionally, ergonomics programs typically contain these core elements:
See appendix C for core elements of an ergonomics program as described in Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants.
There are many options for implementing an ergonomics program. The elements described above should serve as baseline or template, but the addition of other com- ponents is encouraged to make the pro- gram most successful. This guideline con- tains a standard approach for program implementation. It adds additional components and
approaches that have been used effectively in furniture manufacturing facilities. All companies are encouraged to develop and maintain ergonomics programs that effectively address the ergonomics concerns and issues pertinent to their organizations.
To establish a program, it is important to outline a general approach that the company plans to take. Figure 5 illustrates the general steps normally taken to establish and maintain an effective ergonomics program. In all successful programs, companies must address ergonomics from both a reactive (after injury) and proactive (before injury) standpoint.
Documentation of the efforts put forth by a company to address ergonomics concerns is most often accomplished through a formal written ergonomics program. This written program docu- ments the structure of the program, the individuals responsible for particular functions in the pro- gram, and specific solutions to problems that are addressed. This should be a living document that is appended any time ergonomics solutions are developed. This written program can be a very valuable tool to record efforts by a facility to address problems as they arise.
Core Elements
of an Ergonomics Program:
• Identification of problem jobs/areas
• Development of control measures
• Training and education
• Appropriate healthcare management of ergonomics-related cases
Ergonomics Program Management Flow Diagram
Figure 5—A Flow Diagram for Ergonomics Program Management
Throughout this document, the elements and components addressed in the flow diagram are out- lined in further detail.
Evaluate program components periodically Develop corrective action plan Implement corrective action plan Train the team
Develop an ergonomics team or safety team with ergonomics
responsibilities
Obtain management commitment
Assign ergonomics coordinator or responsible person
Develop a company-specific ergonomics program and action plan
Proactive Reactive
Identify ergonomics issues in departments
& company
Investigate reported ergonomics-related
incidents
Evaluate & analyze jobs & work areas
Develop controls Implement controls Follow-up with controls
Measure effectiveness and track success
Document and record
Measure effectiveness and follow up to resolution
Measure effectiveness and track success
Train management, ergonomics team
and shop floor employees
Measure effectiveness and follow up to resolution
Evaluate & analyze affected job &
work area
Return to work with accommodations
as necessary Establish ergonomics
evaluation process
Establish MSD management process
Perform MSD evaluation based on
symptoms
Initiate treatment process and case
management
Establish training process
Management Commitment
As in all safety and health initiatives, management commitment and leadership are critical in the overall success of any program or process. The ergonomics initiative is no different. Management commitment allows for effective allocation of time and resources to minimize the risk of MSDs throughout the organization and provides the necessary support and motivation to realize the many benefits of an effective ergonomics program. Management can demonstrate its commitment to ergonomics by:
•
Understanding the elements involved in an effective ergonomics program•
Developing and instituting clear goals and objectives for the program•
Ensuring adequate education and training to accomplish goals and objectives•
Establishing a system of responsibility and accountability at all levels•
Encouraging participation and involvement at all levels•
Allocating resources to address ergonomics issues within the organization•
Striving to identify and eliminate ergonomics hazards in the work operations•
Maintaining a system to promptly and effectively address physical complaints•
Integrating safety and health as a value in the workplace while partnering with produc- tivity and quality issues•
Defining a system for effective documentation and program evaluation•
Developing a procedure for equipment evaluation prior to purchase and installation (a sample checklist can be found in appendix F)•
Defining a system for effective documentation and program evaluationEmployee Participation and Involvement
A successful integration of ergonomics into the overall safety and health program keys not only on management commitment but employee participation as well. Just as management is actively involved in establishing and implementing the ergonomics process, employees can demonstrate their commitment by:
•
Identifying ergonomics issues•
Participating in control measure development and implementation•
Contributing to ergonomics teams or committees•
Reporting early signs and symptoms of physical problemsA Team Approach
It has been demonstrated in many organizations that a team approach to implementing a multi- component ergonomics program can be very effective in reducing MSDs and addressing ergonom- ics concerns within the organization. Some facilities may find alternate approaches to accomplish these goals. But, despite the approach taken, ergonomics intervention is most successful when all levels and functions are involved in its implementation.
Ergonomics teams traditionally pull together representatives from all appropriate areas in a depart- ment or facility. Close communication and feedback between employees and supervisory, medical, engineering and management personnel are vital when trying to maintain and demonstrate
ergonomics commitment. Teams bring to play the experience, talents and skills of the organiza- tion. Teams can be assembled to accomplish a variety of goals including, but not limited to:
•
Establishing, documenting and managing the overall ergonomics program•
Tracking trend information for hazard identification•
Identifying, prioritizing, analyzing and correcting ergonomics hazards or workplace deficiencies•
Performing workplace assessments to address employee complaints or medical incidents•
Testing new processes, tools, equipment or work methodsTeams can be established in many different ways and evolve over time to accommodate the changing environment in a facility. Some ergonomics programs begin with a general
approach—adding ergonomics components to safety or production teams. Others separate safety and ergonomics elements by having two or more distinct teams. In these cases, company teams may have common members. It is best to assemble a team that fits the structure and culture of the organization.
When pursuing a team approach, first establish the structure of the team, then define its purpose and goals to accomplish. Other activities may be established as the team is defined. Elements may include, but are not limited to, the following:
•
Selecting team members and defining the size of the team appropriate for size and structure of the facility•
Establishing roles and responsibilities of the members•
Determining the frequency of team meetings and new member selection•
Training the team to accomplish the established goals•
Defining documentation tools including team meeting agenda format, ergonomics eval- uation forms, project documentation, etc.Examples of team structures proven successful in furniture and other organizations are included in appendix D. Additionally, this appendix includes guidance on training the team, forming subteams to achieve greater employee involvement and ideas for running an effective team meeting.
Identifying Ergonomics Concerns
Trends Analysis
There are many indications that ergonomics-related problems may exist in a facility or specific area. Looking for trends is an important step in identifying problem areas and ergonomics con- cerns. The objective of a trends analysis is to identify areas, or potential areas, of ergonomic con- cern within a specific job, department or operation. Use multiple sources of information to assess where the most significant problems, or potential problems, exist. Several areas where trends can be analyzed include, but are not limited to:
•
OSHA injury and illness records (OSHA logs)•
First aid logs•
Workers’ compensation records•
Lost-time and restricted duty records•
Production and quality records•
Turnover and absenteeism records•
Employee commentsAdditionally, subtle signs within the workplace may also be indicative of ergonomics-related problems. These include, but are not limited to:
•
Employees regularly complaining of discomfort and/or soreness•
Employees taking frequent rest breaks due to fatigue•
Employees shaking/rubbing arms, hands, shoulders or back due to discomfort•
Employees making modifications to the workstations or equipment to increase comfort•
Employees wearing personally purchased protective productsTrends analysis can be used to identify jobs or areas of priority ergonomics concern during a spe- cific period of time, can focus the ergonomics coordinator or team working on key issues and can evaluate how the department or facility is progressing against program goals over a period of time.
OSHA Injury and Illness Recordkeeping Review
OSHA recordkeeping forms are often considered the best place to begin a trends analysis, a proce- dural examination of workplace incidents that can assist in determining where to focus safety and health resources. OSHA regulations require all furniture manufacturers with a staff larger than 10 people per year to complete special forms about the safety and health of their employees. These forms can contain significant information for determining problem areas and injuries or illnesses in a workplace.
Key information on OSHA Form 300, Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, to collect for the trends analysis would include:
•
Case number or name for identification purposes•
Job title•
Date of injury or onset of illness•
Department or section where the event occurred•
Description of symptoms or diagnosis (if applicable) and what body parts were affected•
Determination of injury or illness*•
Days away from work•
Days of restricted work or job transfer*Acute traumas, such as back injuries and muscle strains are noted in injury column (1); MSDs are noted in column (5)—all other illnesses.
Consider only cases that are ergonomics related. It is best to look at the description of injury/ill- ness column and identify signs, symptoms and diagnoses pertinent to ergonomics-related MSDs.
Appendix A identifies several common MSDs. Symptoms listed on the logs may include, but are not limited to: muscle or joint pain, soreness, swelling, redness, numbness, tingling, burning sen- sation, stiffness, weakness, pulled muscle, strain, and back pain. There may be other injuries/ill- nesses and symptoms that are noted in the records but are not on these lists. If questions arise, it is best to consult with a health care professional for clarification.
Another source of more detailed injury and illness data is OSHA Form 301, Injury and Illness Incident Report, or an equivalent form. This form provides more information about each recorded case and may be important to determine specific details on how an injury or illness occurred.
Facilities that have small numbers of injuries and illnesses may prefer to start with form 301, or equivalent, analysis.
Sample spreadsheet formats for collecting analysis data from forms 300 and 301 are shown in appendix E. To analyze collected data, separate back injuries and other MSDs by location. Use the descriptions of the workplace locations, job titles, and types of injury or illness to determine the areas in which a more detailed analysis of the job may be needed.
It is best to review the 300 logs at least annually, depending on the size of the facility. Larger facilities may need to plan quarterly reviews.
First Aid Logs
In an effort to identify problem areas as early as possible, consider using first aid records, or daily logs, to assist in analysis of initial symptoms. Nonmedical treatment, such as use of nonprescrip- tion medications, hot and cold therapy, and nonrigid means of support (such as elastic bandages) may serve as a means of early identification of trouble spots.
Workers’ Compensation Information
Workers’ compensation claims may offer information related to expenses involved in various types of ergonomic injuries. These data can often be useful in helping to prioritize efforts based on the severity of the problems.
Lost-Time and Restricted Work Records
The OSHA logs show the number of lost and restricted workdays associated with each recorded incident. Lost and restricted workdays may indicate that employees are not reporting cumulative trauma-related MSDs early enough. Lost-time and restricted workdays escalate when symptoms progress untreated.
Production and Quality Records
Medical incidents and absenteeism may sometimes correlate to the amount of work performed during specific periods or scheduling intervals. Periods of heavy production, particularly in labor- intensive jobs, often result in an increased occurrence of MSDs. Other production issues such as seasonal or periodic work can also create short-term spikes in frequency.
Quality problems may indicate that employees are fatigued, that the job is too difficult (either physically or mentally), that the workstation/work method is poor, or that too much work is being completed too rapidly.
Turnover and Absenteeism Records
An operation that has high employee turnover and high absenteeism may indicate ergonomic problems with the job or work area.
Employee Comments
It is important to note employee comments or concerns regarding the job or workplace. These comments may be rendered during production, safety or other meeting settings; solicited during a walk-through or evaluation of the job or area; communicated through a “suggestion box” environ- ment; or collected during a survey. This information is useful for determining areas of focus as well as for documentation of workplace improvement over time.
Workplace Analysis
The purpose of workplace analysis is to identify key ergonomic stressors associated with jobs, tasks and/or operations allowing the development of appropriate control measures that eliminate or significantly reduce risk of musculoskeletal disorder development. Workplace analysis can be both a reactive and a proactive process. Reactively, workplace analysis takes the form of an inci- dent-specific evaluation. Proactively, workplace analysis is the next step after facility or depart- ment-wide trends analysis reveals problematic jobs, tasks and operations.
There are many different types of workplace analysis methods. Methods may range from simple observation of a job or work task to using a checklist format to collect multiple workplace compo- nents to conducting a more detailed analysis with measurement tools and quantification tech- niques. The method selected generally depends on the type of work activity performed, the com- plexity of the operation or problem and the level of ergonomics knowledge of the evaluator.
Checklists are the most widely used and provide a basic and structured means of collecting and recording information. Evaluators can develop specific checklists for their operations and facility or utilize an existing checklist format. Appendix F provides several checklist formats used suc- cessfully by several furniture manufacturers. Additionally, other tools available that take a more detailed approach to workplace analysis are also provided in appendix F. Whatever methodology is used for workplace analysis, ensure that all critical components of the work environment and operations are assessed and/or measured for all ergonomic stressors.
Conducting a Workplace Analysis
Utilizing results from the trends analysis and other pertinent information, jobs or work areas iden- tified as causing or likely to cause MSDs within the facility should be prioritized based on the extent of the risk. MSD incident reviews should be conducted as needed. Evaluators should be knowledgeable on how to effectively identify ergonomic stressors to ensure that key concerns are addressed. Each analysis method employed may have specific needs in terms of information to collect or measure. In general, the following information is typically collected or observed during a worksite analysis:
•
Videotape of job, task, process or operationVideotaping allows evaluators to observe all aspects of the job or task, slow down and playback key elements of the operation, review more obscure events at a closer glance, compare various operator methods, reduce poten- tially stressful over-the-shoulder task analysis, and capture work conditions for “before changes” documenta- tion.
•
Tasks performedObservation of job elements and tasks performed provides insight into potential problem areas. The breakdown of job tasks allows ergonomic stressors to be associated with each task, often revealing one or several key ele- ments as the “root cause” of a problem. This information allows for targeted control measures to be developed and helps document the level of exposure to stressors.
•
Force measurements (as applicable)Weights of objects lifted, pushed, pulled, or handled should be collected to determine the required force to per- form the job or task. Note the way the load is handled, the frequency of handling and whether assist devices are used.
•
PosturesEach part of the body (hands/wrists, arms/elbows, shoulders, back and legs/feet) has the ability to maneuver in various ranges from neutral to extreme postures to perform work. Note tasks where awkward postures are observed per body part. A Posture Identification Sheet is shown in appendix B.
•
Exposure to ergonomic stressorsExposure to the stressors involved in a job or task can be expressed as the percentage of a work shift that requires the same motions or activities to be performed. Ergonomic stress due to repetitions is a function of the duration and variety of the motions performed. Repetition is low when the task motion (regardless of its dura- tion) is infrequent or performed with many built-in interruptions. The risk of injury and illness increases as the exposure to ergonomic stressors increases.
•
Job methodsWhen multiple employees are performing the same job, differences in job methods can reveal changes in ergonomic stressor exposure. Analyzing method variations can reveal opportunities for positive change.
•
Workstation layout and dimensionsExposure to workplace stressors can often result from the design and layout of the workstation or area. As perti- nent to the stressors identified, work area heights and reaches and dimensions of the worktable or surface can reveal problem areas.
•
Tool properties (if used)Several attributes of tools used in an operation can contribute to stressor exposures. Weights of tools handled, size of the handle, length of the tool, postures assumed for use, power versus manual, vibration issues and main- tenance of the tool are several factors to measure and observe.
•
Production informationAwareness of production rates, quality standards, break schedules, job rotation schedules and other production information can help to identify areas of key concern within a job or operation. Changes in this information over time compared to incidence information can reveal potential problems.
•
Work environmentEnvironmental issues within the workplace can contribute to the onset of fatigue and potential injury or illness.
Exposure to temperature, noise, lighting and air contaminants can all be measured when applicable.
•
Employee commentsDuring the course of collecting information about the performance of the job and tasks, employees may com- ment on concerns within the job, favorable aspects of the process, suggestions for improvement, etc.
Incorporating these comments into the workplace analysis process strengthens the analysis process and often provides insight for the best control measure to be developed.
Assessing Analysis Results
Once information is collected and reviewed, prioritize the concerns within each job analyzed so that the most significant risk is addressed first. Determine if additional detail or other analysis tools are needed to clarify or quantify stressor exposure. Please note that more detailed analysis and quantification of stressor exposure may be necessary to develop and justify control measures.
For example, utilizing the NIOSH lifting equation to measure exposure to stressors associated with manual materials handling. The recommended weight limit derived from measuring and cal- culating certain variables provides a clearer path in control measure direction and assists with jus- tification. The NIOSH lifting equation and other tools for workplace analysis are outlined in appendix F.
Analyzing MSD Incidents
An incident review should be triggered when an MSD or signs and symptoms of an MSD are reported. A workplace analysis can be performed to determine possible problem areas within the job, tasks, workstation, work methods, etc. The sooner analysis methods and control measures are employed, the sooner the case may be resolved. Incorporate the results of the incident reviews to make proactive change in the workplace. Several checklist formats that may be used for incident review or assessment of the workplace are shown in appendix F.
Refer to figure 5 for an illustration of how the MSD management and ergonomics evaluation processes work together.
Ergonomic Control Strategies
The most critical component to any ergonomics program is ergonomic control. Ergonomic con- trols are simply methods that are used to eliminate or reduce exposure of the employees to the ergonomic stressors associated with the development of MSDs. These control strategies can be divided into three categories: engineering controls, work practice controls and administrative con- trols. Techniques used to control exposure to the ergonomic stressors for the development of MSDs can vary considerably between facilities and within a facility. Most effective approaches involve a combination of engineering controls, work practice controls and administrative controls.
Engineering Controls
Engineering controls are those modifications to the workplace that fundamentally change the employee exposure by physically modifying the work or workplace. These changes include modi- fying workstations, changing the tools or equipment used to perform the work, or modifying the production techniques to eliminate or reduce the magnitude of one or more ergonomic stressors for MSDs.
The following list of engineering control ideas/concepts is not meant to be an exhaustive list but is presented to give examples of engineering control ideas (Cohen, 1997):
•
Changing the way materials, parts and products can be transported—for example, using mechanical assist devices to relieve heavy load lifting and carrying tasks or using handles or slotted hand holes in packages requiring manual handling (such as using vacuum lifts to lift and move large panels and table tops, overhead hoists for moving large cases, conveyance systems for moving casegoods or upholstered pieces)•
Changing the process or product to reduce employee exposures to ergonomic stressors (reorienting parts on a cabinet line to allow for easy access with a screwgun)•
Modifying containers and parts presentation, such as height-adjustable material bins•
Changing workstation layout, which might include using height-adjustable work- benches or locating tools and materials within short reaching distances (height adjustable upholstery bucks, suspended hand tools)•
Changing the way parts, tools and materials are manipulated—for example, using fix- tures (clamps, vise-grips, etc.) to hold work pieces to relieve the need for awkward hand and arm positions or suspending tools to reduce weight and allow easier access (suspended staple guns, screw guns)•
Changing tool designs—for example, pistol handle grips for knives to reduce wrist bending postures required by straight-handle knives or squeeze-grip-actuated screw- drivers to replace finger-trigger-actuated screwdrivers•
Changing materials and fasteners—for example, lighter-weight packaging materials to reduce lifting loads, changing from a slotted screw to a Phillips head screw for easier application•
Changing assembly access and sequence—for example, removing physical and visual obstructions when assembling components to reduce awkward postures or static exer- tions•
Adjusting the work pace to relieve repetitive motion risks and give the employee more control of the work process•
Providing anti-vibration and anti-fatigue materials—for example, gloves and floor matsIn general, these controls are preferred over work practice and administrative controls because they eliminate or significantly reduce the risk at the source. Further, engineering controls are often found to be the most cost-effective solutions in the long term, because they tend to fix the prob- lem completely and do not require ongoing administrative effort by management. In many cases this may have an additional effect of decreasing employee training costs.
Illustrations in appendix G show a number of engineering controls that have been developed for various furniture manufacturing work tasks. It should be noted that the effectiveness of an engi- neering control is often task/facility specific and therefore these solutions should be carefully con- sidered with regard to a specific application. In creating these pages the company who submitted the example briefly describes the problem that the control was built to address, describes the con- trol (if possible, including a picture), discusses the impact of the control, cost of the control and any additional comments.
Work Practice Controls
Work practice controls are those modifications to the work methods used by the employee to reduce exposure to ergonomic stressors. Work practice controls can include both formal proce- dures and policies developed by management and handed down to employees and supervisors—
for example, specific tasks that require a two-person lift—as well as more general informational policies such as employees are to always lift with their legs not their backs. These work practice controls should be understood and followed by managers, supervisors and employees. Often work practice control development requires formal and regular training and education. Employees need to be taught appropriate work techniques as well as basic body mechanics.
The following list of work practice control ideas/concepts is not meant to be an exhaustive list but is presented to give examples of work practice control ideas:
•
Changing a lifting task from a one-person lift to a two-person lift (upholsterers and spring up operators)•
Encouraging employees to perform manual tasks with straight wrists where possible•
Encouraging employees to keep shoulders in a relaxed position while performing manual tasks where possible•
Encouraging employees to perform lifting tasks with the load as close to the body as possible and use the legs as much as possible to reduce the loading on the low back•
During brief pauses in the work cycle allowing the muscles to rest to reduce the accu- mulation of fatigue (micro breaks)•
Establishing policies and procedures for appropriate tool use (random orbital sander use policy)•
Requiring inspection of tools to verify that they are in good condition (sharpening of scissors and other tools to reduce force exertions)The downside to the work practices control approach is that these controls require vigilance both on the part of the employees and management to make them effective. In comparison with the engineering controls, which fundamentally change the exposure of the employee to the stressor, work practice controls have been shown to be disregarded in times of peak stress (such as meeting a production deadline). Specific examples include disregarding the two-person lift policy, use of unorthodox and hazardous lifting techniques, and using the bare hand as a hammer because the necessary mallet is too far away from the employee’s current location.
Administrative Controls
Administrative controls are those control measures designed to reduce exposure of the employees to ergonomic stressors through the development of specific policies/procedures. While engineer- ing controls are the preferred method of addressing these ergonomic stressors, administrative con- trols can be helpful as temporary measures until engineering controls can be implemented or when engineering controls are not technically feasible. In some cases, the combination of administrative, engineering and work practice controls provide the best control option.
The following list of administrative control ideas/concepts is not an exhaustive list but is present- ed to give examples of administrative control ideas (Cohen, 1997):
•
Rotating employees through several jobs with different physical demands to reduce the stress on limbs and body regions (job rotation)•
Broadening or varying the job content to offset certain ergonomic stressors (job enlargement)•
Implementing appropriate work-hardening procedures for new employees•
Scheduling more breaks to allow for rest and recovery•
Reducing shift length or amount of overtime allowed•
Training in the recognition of ergonomic stressors and instruction in work practices that can ease the task demands or burden•
Implementing mandatory warm-up and stretching exercisesSince administrative controls do not eliminate hazards, one of the ongoing costs of administrative controls is that management must ensure that the practices and policies are followed. This may involve weekly development of job rotation schedules, continuous training of employees to allow for job enlargement, and ongoing training and education. Further, job rotation (one of the often used administrative control approaches) requires that the person creating the job rotation is able to identify an appropriate sequence of jobs that allows body parts stressed under one task to rest dur- ing another, a challenging task in most workplaces. Challenges with regard to job rotation include establishing the acceptable duration of exposure to the hazardous task and the training and cross- training time and cost often required. Training the workforce on sound body mechanics and good work practices has been shown to be an effective tool to reduce risk of injury, especially in situa- tions when work activities do not run “as scheduled” and the individual employee must work in an environment without the appropriate engineering control.
Documentation of Ergonomic Improvements
As companies take steps to control ergonomic stressors in the workplace, it is imperative to track and document improvements that affect employee morale, productivity and quality. Time, effort and money spent on these projects should be documented in a manner that allows the organization to continue its efforts to eliminate ergonomic stressors as new processes enter the workplace.
Ergonomic projects and improvements should be documented regardless of size, impact, cost or scope. Even projects that failed to attain the goals of the project should be documented, as valu- able lessons can be learned from failures as well as successes.
Although companies may choose different methods to document ergonomic improvements and no single method will satisfy every company’s needs, there are some elements that should be incor- porated into most documentation processes. Appendix H provides a summary of documentation points to assist companies in developing their own ergonomic documentation process.
Additionally, a sample tool is provided. Appendix I provides a brief discussion to determine the return on investment (ROI) for an ergonomics project as well as a sample calculation.
Web-based Repository
Innovative people in the furniture manufacturing industry continue to develop new control meas- ures; consequently, those control measures displayed here are only part of what will be available in the future. Therefore, this document should not be perceived as a static document, but instead as a living document that will continue to grow as new ergonomic solutions are created. This copy contains a subset of the ergonomics control strategies that have been created to date and have been generously shared by the companies who developed them. A more complete listing of control strategies can be found at http://www.afma4u.org/. It is hoped that as readers of this document and the Web site continue to develop ergonomic interventions for their facilities that they will share those ergonomic interventions with the rest of the industry in an effort to reduce the overall inci- dence of MSDs.
Contact the American Furniture Manufacturers Association through Bill Perdue at [email protected]
or Gary Mirka, Ph.D., at [email protected] in the Department of Industrial Engineering
at North Carolina State University.
Administrative Management
Ergonomics Training Practices
Training and education are an integral part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the incidence and severity of work-related injuries, particularly those that often have a pattern of gradual onset such as cumulative trauma disorders. Training is necessary to equip management, employees and the on-site ergonomics team with the knowledge and skills necessary to be a part of a system to recognize and control these disorders. The specifics of the training that are outlined below may vary depending on the specific group to be trained and their role in this effort. The benefits to be gained by an effective ergonomics training program are the reduction in both the numbers and severity of work-related MSD injuries/illnesses and, as a result, a reduction in costs.
Management Training
Training and education of management is specifically focused on basic education and the ways that management can most effectively facilitate the work of the employees in their facility. Typical content of management training sessions should include:
•
Basic principles involved in ergonomics•
Basics of effective ergonomic task/workplace design•
Components of a sound ergonomics program•
Resources required to make the program work•
What to expect as the ergonomics program is developed•
Benefits of a sound ergonomics program (positive impact on quality, efficiency, pro- ductivity and injury cost control).Management training is generally the first training performed to ensure management’s commit- ment to the process. This training is usually completed in a 1–1.5 hour time frame. The benefits gained through management training are:
•
Management’s understanding of how these disorders develop•
Management’s understanding the importance of the application of ergonomics to their prevention•
Solidification of management’s commitment to the ergonomics process Ergonomics Team TrainingThe training of the ergonomics team is, by necessity, much more in-depth and hands-on than the management training. The ergonomics team is the group of individuals responsible for the devel- opment and maintenance of the ergonomics effort within the facility. As such, they should be trained to use the various ergonomics tools that are employed during the identification of ergonomics concerns and control process. Toward this end, the content of this training should include the following:
•
Basic principles involved in ergonomics•
Methods of identifying high-risk jobs•
Methods of evaluating jobs to identify potential problem areas•
Methods of effective ergonomic task/workplace design•
Components of a sound ergonomics program•
Hands-on work addressing the ergonomic issues in a specific set of jobsTraining time for the team can vary in length, but it is typically accomplished in a two-day format that includes a considerable amount of hands-on learning where the participants perform an evalu- ation of a specific job in their own facility. The benefits gained through ergonomics team training are:
•
Development of in-house expertise in the identification and control of problem jobs•
Reduced reliance on external consultants•
Ability of a facility to have a “rapid response” to a concern raised by shop floor employeesShop Floor Employee Training
The training for shop floor employees should be very focused training that presents the informa- tion necessary for these individuals to be a functional part of this ergonomics process. Topics gen- erally covered in such training include:
•
Basic principles involved in ergonomics•
Workplace ergonomic stressors•
Non-work-related risk factors for the development of MSDs•
Early warning signs and symptoms for MSD development•
How to interact and express concern to individuals responsible for ergonomics in the facility•
Benefits to the business and to the individual that accrue from learning and applying sound ergonomic principles.This should be very focused training that can be completed in 30–45 minutes and conducted in groups of 20–40 employees. Industry experience indicates that hands-on training is very effective.
Training with examples is also recommended. The benefits gained through shop floor employee training are:
•
Early reporting of discomfort potentially leading to a solution before a problem becomes chronic and costly•
Employee awareness of non-work activities that can contribute to musculoskeletal dis- orders•
Having the employees equipped with the tools necessary to participate actively in the ergonomics program including solution developmentAppendix J provides training and education approaches that have been successful in furniture manufacturing companies.
Employee Placement Strategies
Many jobs in the furniture manufacturing industry, by their nature, require robust physical attrib- utes (strength and endurance) on the part of the operator due to the basic physical dimensions of the product being produced. While job placement strategies are not regarded as the “ultimate solu- tion” to ergonomic concerns, for jobs that do not present feasible engineering controls or adminis- trative controls, they represent measures that can be used to improve the fit between specific, high-challenge jobs and the capabilities of job candidates. All efforts should be made to use engi- neering controls to reduce stresses to levels that present little or no risk to the widest possible seg- ment of the working population. In the furniture manufacturing industry, job placement proce- dures can augment these engineering controls and can be a valuable tool in reducing the incidence and severity of work-related MSDs.
Evaluation Process Characteristics
One of the major considerations in devising and implementing a structured job placement proce- dure is the duty of employers to comply with federal, state and local equal opportunity laws and regulations including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In these cases it is best for the company to consult with its human resources manager and/or general counsel. This document does not purport to provide legal advice; however, research relative to this issue shows that a number of considerations are important to this matter.
Evaluation Process Models
Neither the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses, the American Physical Therapy Association, nor the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine have a prac- tice guideline or standard protocol for performing physical capacity evaluations of candidates for employment. Therefore, the models available consist of proprietary methods developed by indi- vidual companies serving as consultants to management. The following key points summarize several of the approaches commonly used. An expanded view of this information is included in appendix K.
Placement evaluation measures must be:
